S-92 Procurement Potential Snags (Split from: Canada considers purchase of used US Army Chinooks)
- Thread starter Armymatters
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 13,087
- Points
- 1,010
That, my friend, will be coming to an Operation sooner than you might think. We are already in the process of shifting some focus towards the Army, with our current fleet.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
Zoomie said:
Are you talking Cyclone or Sea King?
In the case of Sea Kings, we have 6 Bravo models that could be stripped down to around 14,000 lbs operating weight or less, add troop seats and be able to lift 8-10 guys (AUW is 20,500 lbs). Since the helos probably wouldn't be folded, those parts won't break, sonar problems become non-factors, and a few other things wouldn't be needed, thus it becomes quite a simple machine.
In the case of the Cyclone, even with it's full mission kit, operating weight will be around 16,000 lbs, with 5000 lbs of fuel, that still leaves 7000 lbs of payload.
The kit isn't "hard mounted" in the sense of being welded to the floor and incapable of being removed. Our techs removed the sonar from our helo in a couple hours enroute to Op Unison. The Cyclone is going to be similar, it's got to be able to be removed, even just for maintenance.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
Zoom-a-loom
In standard layout, there will be 6 troop seats.
I haven't seen any specs or layouts for additional troop seats with the sonar in place, though the TACCO/AESOP consoles are on the side of the cabin with the the sonar reeling machine and sonobuoy launcher on the opposite side, thus if you take out the sonar reeling machine and sonobuoy launcher, the entire right side of the cabin could have troop seats. As far as how many there would be, I have no idea as of yet since those configs haven't worked their way down to my IPC.
In standard layout, there will be 6 troop seats.
I haven't seen any specs or layouts for additional troop seats with the sonar in place, though the TACCO/AESOP consoles are on the side of the cabin with the the sonar reeling machine and sonobuoy launcher on the opposite side, thus if you take out the sonar reeling machine and sonobuoy launcher, the entire right side of the cabin could have troop seats. As far as how many there would be, I have no idea as of yet since those configs haven't worked their way down to my IPC.
- Reaction score
- 13,087
- Points
- 1,010
Last I saw for the Cyclone (last week), there will be provisions made (ie some sort of kit) to seat up to 22 troops in first class comfort 
. That would, of course mean that alot of mission kit would have to be removed (ie sonar, sonobuoy dispenser).
. That would, of course mean that alot of mission kit would have to be removed (ie sonar, sonobuoy dispenser).
Fast Roping was done out of Canadian Sea Kings for Op Friction (ie Gulf War I). We no longer have the capability, although there has been talk of reviving it for last couple years. There was an attempt to bring it back for Op Apollo but basically the Navy said they didn't want the capability and wouldn't pay for it.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
geo said:
Why would SAR types be doing fast rope and rappel over anyone else?
They've got a hoist (I think 2 actually). The time it takes to hoist down a SAR Tech vs fast roping is negligible, besides, at least you can raise a hoist if the ship they're getting on is pitching and rolling, not exactly the case with a fast rope or rappel.
- Reaction score
- 305
- Points
- 880
No such thing as fast roping out of a helo in the SAR world - hoist work is their primary means of insertion and recovery.
I would think that fast-roping may be reintroduced into the "green" world with the inception of 427 SOA in Pet. Who knows what the DHTC boys can do out of a helo - we don't talk about that here.
I would think that fast-roping may be reintroduced into the "green" world with the inception of 427 SOA in Pet. Who knows what the DHTC boys can do out of a helo - we don't talk about that here.
[Agreed. I'm almost surprised AETE hasn't jumped on this one. It is a dynamic component, but it's not rocket science. Do they even have a Cormorant airframe? Will there be enough Cyclone airframes to second one to AETE?
Actually AETE is all over it and the H-92 as well.
Actually AETE is all over it and the H-92 as well.
- Reaction score
- 18,531
- Points
- 1,360
Didn't the boarding party fastrope onto the GTS Katie...or was that rappel?
Regardless, I support H3tacco and others that FR will be done by MH in the future, likely within the "capability package" that will be demanded of it in the standing contingency task force (SCTF).
On the non-maritime side of things, with the CSOR coming under CANSOFCOM, I think it's fair to say that FR will remain a tool for CANSOFCOM units only, and not find it's way into LFC units' repetoires...
p.s. I have the same gut feel at Inch and h3, I think the Cyclone will do just fine (little gotcha's are to be expected).
p.p.s Who said the AW520 Cormorant was just a civy certified EH-101 Merlin? I think a bit of research will prove that is not at all the case. There are a huge amount of MIL-SPEC/MIL-STD compliant systems on the EH-101 that the AW520 neither requires nor has...
Cheers,
Duey
Regardless, I support H3tacco and others that FR will be done by MH in the future, likely within the "capability package" that will be demanded of it in the standing contingency task force (SCTF).
On the non-maritime side of things, with the CSOR coming under CANSOFCOM, I think it's fair to say that FR will remain a tool for CANSOFCOM units only, and not find it's way into LFC units' repetoires...
p.s. I have the same gut feel at Inch and h3, I think the Cyclone will do just fine (little gotcha's are to be expected).
p.p.s Who said the AW520 Cormorant was just a civy certified EH-101 Merlin? I think a bit of research will prove that is not at all the case. There are a huge amount of MIL-SPEC/MIL-STD compliant systems on the EH-101 that the AW520 neither requires nor has...
Cheers,
Duey
- Reaction score
- 13,087
- Points
- 1,010
Nope. A very long, slow series of hoists. Not especially tactical...
- Reaction score
- 337
- Points
- 780
Replying to something that was said earlier in this thread (I was away on leave for a week ;D)
...
Something that hasn't been mentioned in the commonality theme is the (lucky coincidence?) that the mission systems are largely common with AIMP (Aurora). It so happens that the Prime is the same (General Dynamics Canada), and by choice of that contractor the Radar, ESM, Link-11/22 and to a certain extent mission data and acoustic systems will be common with AIMP. This also helps with h3tacco's assessment #2 of mission system integration problems.
Notwithstanding, I think h3tacco (trying to place who this is) has it right when he says that the fly-by-wire and the mission systems stand out as issues, and as everyone has said other issues of buying a relatively new airframe will crop up.
By the way, for those with DWAN access the lift capabilities of the utility variant of the S-92 are available on the SCTF website in one of the briefs...
...
Something that hasn't been mentioned in the commonality theme is the (lucky coincidence?) that the mission systems are largely common with AIMP (Aurora). It so happens that the Prime is the same (General Dynamics Canada), and by choice of that contractor the Radar, ESM, Link-11/22 and to a certain extent mission data and acoustic systems will be common with AIMP. This also helps with h3tacco's assessment #2 of mission system integration problems.
Notwithstanding, I think h3tacco (trying to place who this is) has it right when he says that the fly-by-wire and the mission systems stand out as issues, and as everyone has said other issues of buying a relatively new airframe will crop up.
By the way, for those with DWAN access the lift capabilities of the utility variant of the S-92 are available on the SCTF website in one of the briefs...
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
Howdy,
What do you think about the Sikorsky strike? I wonder if this might cause a significant delay in the Cyclone delivery date. The strike is in it's fourth week now but the company has made an offer.
http://www.connpost.com/business/ci_3591917
What do you think about the Sikorsky strike? I wonder if this might cause a significant delay in the Cyclone delivery date. The strike is in it's fourth week now but the company has made an offer.
http://www.connpost.com/business/ci_3591917
Similar threads
